Absolutely Null and Utterly Void the 1968 Rite of Episcopal Consecration — Rev
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Absolutely Null and Utterly Void The 1968 Rite of Episcopal Consecration — Rev. Anthony Cekada — www.traditionalmass.org would need to be conditionally ordained first, because “Once there are no more valid priests they’ll Paul VI had changed the rite for Holy Orders. permit the Latin Mass.” The Archbishop explained that the new form (es- — Rev. Carl Pulvermacher OFMCap sential formula) in the rite for priestly ordination was Former Editor, The Angelus doubtful because one word had been subtracted. The “Keep the shell, but empty it of its substance.” new form for episcopal consecration, the Arch- — V.I. Lenin bishop continued, was completely different and thus invalid. IN THE 1960’S* Catholics who were upset by the post- Despite the gravity of the question, only a few tra- Vatican II liturgical changes had already begun to ditionalist writers examined the post-Vatican II ordi- 1 worry whether sacraments conferred with the re- nation rites, even after Tridentine Indult Masses formed rites were valid. A defining moment in the started to multiply. Increasingly, these were offered by United States came in 1967 when Patrick Henry Omlor priests ordained by bishops consecrated in the new published the first edition of his study, Questioning the rite, and belonging to groups such as the Fraternity of Validity of Masses using the All-English Canon, a work St. Peter. If their ordaining bishops were invalidly that, even before the promulgation of the Novus Ordo consecrated, the sacraments these priests confected in 1969, galvanized the then-tiny traditionalist resis- would likewise be invalid. tance. After Benedict XVI was elected in 2005, however, As the modernist “reformers” overhauled the other the issue resurfaced. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, ap- sacramental rites — Confirmation, Penance and Ex- pointed an Archbishop and Cardinal by Paul VI, had treme Unction — traditionalists questioned the valid- been consecrated with the new rite on May 25, 1977. ity of these sacraments as well, and sought out priests Was he, apart from the sede vacante controversy, even a who offered the traditional Mass and used the old real bishop? rites. In the summer of 2005, a French traditionalist pub- Holy Orders was the one sacrament that tradition- lisher, Editions Saint-Remi, published the first vol- 2 alists did not seem to worry about. Sure, there were no ume of Rore Sanctifica, a book-length dossier of docu- vocations. But since few laymen had ever even seen an mentation and commentary on the Paul VI Rite of ordination — still less knew what made an ordination Episcopal Consecration. The study, featuring on its valid — how or whether the liturgical changes affected cover side-by-side photos of Ratzinger and SSPX Su- the validity of Holy Orders was a topic that went un- perior General Mgr. Bernard Fellay, concluded that examined. the new rite was invalid. I encountered the issue by chance during my first This naturally caught the attention of higher-ups in year (1975-76) at the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) semi- the SSPX in Europe, who were by then negotiating nary at Ecône, Switzerland. I went to ask Archbishop with Benedict XVI to obtain special status in the Vati- Marcel Lefebvre about whether conservative friends can II church. How could SSPX’s superiors rally tradi- from my former seminary could work with the Society tionalists to a pope who may not even be a bishop? after ordination. He told me yes, in principle, but they The Dominicans in Avrillé, France, a traditionalist religious order in the SSPX orbit, immediately took up the task of trying to make a convincing case for the * FATHER ANTHONY CEKADA teaches sacramental moral theology, canon 1. The only widely-circulated study in English I know of is R. Coomaras- law, and liturgy at Most Holy Trinity Seminary, Brooksville Florida. He was wamy, “The Post-Conciliar Rite of Holy Orders,” Studies in Comparative Relig- ordained in 1977 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and has written numerous ion 16.2-2. articles and studies putting forth the traditionalist case. He resides near Cin- 2. Rore Sanctifica: Invalidité du Rite de Consécration Épiscopale de ‘Pontificalis cinnati, where he offers the traditional Latin Mass. Romani’ (Editions Saint-Remi 2005). rore-sanctifica.org — 1 — validity of the new rite. One of them, Fr. Pierre-Marie wildered by talk of Copts, Maronites, Hippolytus and OP, produced a lengthy article in favor of it that the the mysterious governing Spirit. Dominicans published in their quarterly, Sel de la Terre.3 I. Principles to Apply Thilo Stopka, a former SSPX seminarian in Europe, challenged Fr. Pierre-Marie’s conclusions, and in turn PRIMARILY for the benefit of lay readers, we will re- published a great deal of valuable research on the In- view some principles that are used to determine ternet to refute them. whether a sacramental form is valid. The concepts are Meanwhile, the SSPX’s official U.S. publication, not complicated. The Angelus, promptly translated Fr. Pierre-Marie’s article into English, publishing it in two successive A. What is a Sacramental Form? issues (December 2005, January 2006) under the title In catechism class we all learned the definition of a “Why the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration is sacrament: “An outward sign, instituted by Christ to Valid.” give grace.” I find it ironic and particularly sad that such an “Outward sign” in the definition refers to what we article appeared in The Angelus. In August 1977 I vis- see and hear when a sacrament is conferred — the ited an old-line traditionalist in Upper Michigan, Bill priest pours the water on the baby’s head and he re- Hanna. He passed along a favorite quote from Fr. Carl cites the formula “I baptize you,” etc. Pulvermacher, a Capuchin who worked with SSPX Catholic theology teaches that in every sacrament and would later edit The Angelus: “Once there are no this outward sign consists of two elements joined to- more valid priests, they’ll permit the Latin Mass.” gether: Father Carl, it seems, had a bit of the prophet in • Matter: some thing or action your senses can per- him. ceive (pouring water, bread and wine, etc.) In his Angelus article, Fr. Pierre-Marie argued that • Form: the words recited that actually produce the Paul VI Rite of Episcopal Consecration is valid be- the sacramental effect (“I baptize you…” “This is My cause it uses prayers to consecrate bishops that are body…,” etc.) virtually the same as those (a) used in the Catholic Each sacramental rite, no matter how many other Church’s eastern rites, or (b) once used in the ancient prayers and ceremonies the Church has prescribed for Church. it, contains at least one sentence that either Catholic Please note: Paul VI made these same two claims theologians or authoritative Church pronouncements when he promulgated the new consecration rite in have designated as its essential sacramental form. 1968, and both are demonstrably false. It is appalling that the SSPX superiors recycled them to market the B. Omitting the Form validity of that same rite to an unsuspecting tradition- alist laity. All Catholics know verbatim at least one essential To support this argument, Fr. Pierre-Marie offered sacramental form: “I baptize you in the name of the several tables that compare various Latin texts. These Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” we will discuss in an appendix. If at a baptism, the priest says all the other prayers As for the rest of his article, most readers probably and performs all the other ceremonies, but omits this came away from it utterly baffled. For although Fr. one formula when he pours the water, the sacrament Pierre-Marie said he would “proceed according to the is invalid (does not “work”), the grace promised by Scholastic method so as to treat the matter as rigor- Christ is not conferred and the baby is not baptized. ously as possible,” he never managed to focus clearly This much should be obvious. on the two central questions: (1) What principles does Catholic theology employ C. Changes in the Form to determine whether a sacramental form is valid or But another question arises: What if the wording of invalid? a sacramental form is changed? How does this affect (2) How do those principles apply to the new rite validity? of episcopal consecration? The answer depends on whether a change in We will answer both questions here, and draw the meaning also results. Theologians distinguish between appropriate conclusions. Our discussion may be a bit two types of change: technical at times — so I have provided a summary (1) Substantial. (Meaning changed = invalid.) (sect. XI) to which a reader may skip if he gets too be- This occurs “when the meaning of the form itself is corrupted… if the words would have a meaning dif- 3. Sel de la Terre 54 (Fall 2005), 72–129. — 2 — ferent from that intended by the Church.”4 Or put an- in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the other way: If the form “is changed in such a way that Holy Ghost. Amen.”10 the meaning intended or willed by Christ is no longer This preserves each concept that theologians say completely and congruently expressed through it.”5 must appear in a valid form for baptism: the minister A substantial change in a sacramental form is in- (at least implicitly), the act of baptizing, the recipient, troduced through adding, omitting, corrupting, trans- the unity of the divine essence, and the Trinity of per- posing, or exchanging words in the form, or by inter- sons expressed under distinct names.11 rupting them in such a way that the form no longer In the case of an Eastern schismatic group that has retains the same sense.6 Here are two examples: submitted to the pope, moreover, the Church has ex- • Corruption of words: A modernist priest says: “I amined the prayers and ceremonies of its sacramental baptize you in the name of the Mother, and of the rites to insure that they were free from doctrinal error Son…” He has introduced a new word that changes and contained everything necessary for conferring the meaning of one of the essential elements of the true sacraments.